by Muneer A. Malik
IN my first article about the current lawyers'
movement, I had countered skeptics convinced of
its ultimate futility by reminding them that the
longest journey starts with a single step.
Now, as the movement grows from strength to
strength; as hundreds of thousands of people turn
up to show their support from Abbottabad to
Lahore, Peshawar to Chakwal; as an increasingly
desperate regime seeks refuge behind the corps
commanders, I have still not been approached by
any intermediary seeking to broker a compromise.
To save everyone's time, let me make the bar's
position absolutely clear. The demands of the bar
are non-negotiable and brook no compromise. This
is because of the inherent nature of this
movement.
To begin with, what are the objectives of our
movement? Firstly, it is about changing the
mindsets of our people. Throughout our history,
the masses have viewed the bureaucracy, the
military and the judiciary as part of the same
ruling elite, cooperating with each other to
subjugate the people. The minds of the masses
have been inoculated against the concept of true
justice. We were taught obedience at the cost of
our liberty and independence.
This mindset is a hangover from our colonial
past. These institutions were created by the
British as a means of controlling the civilian
populace. They were manned by Englishmen from the
same background taught to venerate the same ideal
- the preservation of the Raj.
Judges and ICS officers were not meant to empower
the masses and improve their lot, they were there
to keep the peace so the British could continue,
unhindered, with their commercial exploitation
and empire building. Likewise, the army's primary
role was internal not external. Their job was to
quell local rebellions that could threaten
British dominance. Alas! This role remains the
same.
Decentralisation and separation of powers were
never on the agenda. When a few thousand
Englishmen set out to establish total control
over a land of three hundred million people, any
localised pockets of power could have proved
fatal. A division of powers between the different
institutions of state would be suicidal.
Our fight is for a separation of powers, for
constitutionalism, for the principle that all men
are equal before the law and for the ideal that
the pen is mightier than the sword.
Thus the DC ruled his district (with the willing
cooperation of the local elite, the feudal lords)
with a free hand and without any constraints. His
basic job was to keep the people quiet and
subservient to imperial dictates.
If populist leaders, like Muhammad Ali Jinnah,
B.G. Tilak or M.K. Gandhi, became too noisy, he
knew he could always call upon his willing
brothers in the judiciary to convict them for
sedition or banish them from the practice of law.
If matters went further, the likes of General
Dyer would bail him out by shooting a few hundred
natives for the restoration of 'peace'.
The supposed impartiality and independence of
judges in the colonial era is a complete myth. Of
course, they were neutral when deciding land
disputes between two natives. But when the
interests of the Raj were at stake, when the
interests of the people collided with those of
their colonial masters, they never let their
government down.Unfortunately, our nation's
independence and the departure of the British did
not bring their system of governance to an end.
Rather, a 'coloured' ruling establishment quietly
stepped into the shoes of their departing masters
and adopted their practices and beliefs. After
all, it was more civilised to be an Englishman,
notwithstanding that you were not admitted to
their clubs unless you served as a waiter.
As a result, concepts such as the rule of law or
the independence of the judiciary never took root
in the minds of our people. We were never
convinced that the judiciary's true function was
to guard the rights of the people and to protect
the masses from oppression.
The first aim of our struggle is to change those
beliefs. We seek to convince the masses that the
courts are not there only to adjudicate property
disputes between rich landowners or the competing
commercial interests of multinational
corporations, but that a truly independent
judiciary will allow the common man to realise
his fundamental rights. That judges with security
of tenure will be fearless enough to administer
true justice. That such judges will protect them
from the abusive exercise of power by the wadera,
the 'seth' or the SHO.
We seek to inculcate the belief that laws are not
meant to be jealously preserved in
jurisprudential tomes but to be applied, by
activist judges, for the protection of the common
man, and that the rule of law is an idea worth
fighting for.
To do so, we have to change the mindset of our
judges about their true duties and functions.
This is our second aim. For too long they have
functioned as if they were part of our
military-bureaucracy, and now the plundering
capitalist (the attempted sale of the Steel Mills
being a case in point), establishment. They need
to realise that they are no longer part of a
foreign force seeking to forcibly impose its will
upon the people. They need to end their
alienation from the masses and align themselves
with the wishes of the people.
Why is it that Justice M.R. Kayani considered it
acceptable to contest elections and become
president of the Civil Servants of Pakistan
Association while he was sitting on the bench of
the high court, particularly when the major
portion of his duties involved the judicial
review of the wrongful acts of civil servants?
It was not because of any particular lack of
integrity on his part. Rather, he was known as
an outspoken and honest judge. It is simply the
pernicious elitism that pervades our entire
judiciary that leads them to ally themselves with
the ruling classes rather than with the masses.
Our judges can easily identify with the causes of
senior government officials but not those of a
'kissan'. That is exactly why I call for a
Supreme Court of the People of Pakistan.
Why is it that high court and Supreme Court
judges consider it perfectly acceptable to lunch
in elitist clubs and exchange views with
industrialists, government ministers and
advisers, bureaucrats et al, but shy away from
sharing a cup of tea with the labourer or
political worker at a trade union function? Does
this not distort their perception about the needs
and aspirations of the people of Pakistan?
The visit of the governor of Sindh - fresh from
his debriefing in London - to the Sindh High
Court is illuminating. Eyebrows were raised when
seven honourable judges examining the May 12
tragedy refused to meet him and he was told that
there could be no discussion on that issue. Why
should there have been even an iota of surprise?
The government of Sindh, and the party to which
the governor belongs, had been directly
implicated in the tragedy of May 12. I say that
at the risk of my life and that of my children.

Would there have been any astonishment if any
judge refused to entertain a common litigant who
wanted to have a cup of tea in the
judge's chamber and discuss the facts of his
case? The commendable behaviour of the Sindh High
Court judges was newsworthy because too often in
the past our judges have fallen short of this
standard of rectitude when it comes to the power
elite.
The idea that judges interpret the law in
splendid isolation strictly in accordance with
recognised and time-tested legal doctrines is
entirely fallacious. Our Supreme Court has
repeatedly pointed out that the Constitution is
an organic document and needs continuous
reinterpretation in light of changing times and
needs. So who will inform them about the changing
needs of the hour? Must it be the generals, the
industrialists and the bureaucrats?
Take the example of the reviled doctrine of
necessity. Blatantly illegal and unconstitutional
acts were repeatedly justified by our
Supreme Court on the basis that they were
necessary for survival of the nation. And who was
the spokesman for the nation? The generals.

Why can't the needs of the nation be determined
by directly listening to the voice of the nation?
Why must the doctrine of necessity always be
employed in favour of the military-bureaucracy
establishment? Can it never be used in the other
direction - to force a general (even if he has
invented a specious legal cover for his actions)
to respect the legitimate desires and aspirations
of the people?
I recall discussing this issue with the late
Justice Dorab Patel. A splendidly honest man, he
felt compelled, nevertheless, to defend his
brethren. He justified previous judicial
decisions based on expediency on the grounds that
they were made by a few old men left alone in
face of the entire army's might. This movement
seeks to reassure our judges that they are not
alone. If they choose to do the right thing, the
whole legal community and the entire nation will
turn out in their support.
The learned Chief Justice is no charismatic
politician. His speeches, on purely legal issues,
do not enthral the nation. But when hundreds of
thousands of people stand all day in Lahore's
scorching heat and brave all night Faisalabad's
thunderstorms waiting to catch a glimpse of him,
they do so to salute the courage of the man. They
do so to show their support for a judge who dares
to say 'no'.
Our aim is to instil that courage in every judge
throughout the land. Our aim is to illuminate a
path that leads beyond the Maulvi Tamizuddin,
Dosso, Nusrat Bhutto and Zafar Ali Shah cases.
Our third objective is to restore civilian
supremacy in Pakistan. We are no longer prepared
to live under the barrel of the gun. Those guns
and their wielders must return to their rightful
positions; facing outwards at the frontiers of
our land. The people will rule themselves.
Of course, our elected politicians will make
mistakes, both honest and dishonest, and there
will be misrule. But the court of
accountability must be 170 million Pakistanis and
not nine corps commanders. Elected governments
must complete their tenure and face
up to their failures at the time of polling
instead of being handed a convenient excuse by
their forced ouster at the hands of the military.
Fourthly, our aim is to strengthen all the
institutions of our state; the executive, the
legislature, the judiciary as well as the media.
Only by strengthening these pillars and strictly
enforcing the limits on their separate powers in
accordance with the Constitution can we protect
ourselves from tyranny and secure the rule of
law. Only then can we rid ourselves of the
inequities of the past.
To achieve these goals, we welcome the support of
every segment of civil society; the media as well
as labour unions, NGOs as well as political
parties. But our demands are non-negotiable. We
will not sacrifice our principles at the altar of
expediency. Any dialogue with the establishment
can only begin after they take steps that
concretely display their commitment to these
principles.
Our history is replete with tragic compromises.
We don't need to go too far. The Zafar Ali Shah
case was a compromise by the judiciary.
Musharraf's military takeover was legitimised in
exchange for a promise that elections would be
held and a civilian government installed within
three years.
Five years have passed since those elections, but
all power still rests with Musharraf and his
corps commanders rather than with the prime
minister and his cabinet. On March 9, 2007, while
cabinet ministers hunkered under their beds, the
ISI, MI and IB chiefs wreaked havoc.
The Seventeenth Amendment was a compromise by the
politicians. Musharraf was allowed to continue
as president despite his uniform in exchange for,
essentially, a verbal promise that he would shed
it in a year. Characteristically, he reneged and
four years later he was donning the same uniform
when he attempted to fire the Chief Justice. No
amount of apology, no matter how sincere, will
bring back lost times and opportunities.
For once in our history, people from every
segment of civil society, judges and politicians
alike, need to stand up for ideals and eschew the
culture of deal-making. The struggle is not for
tawdry offices and superficial power; it is about
principles. If we can maintain our united
commitment to these principles, we shall triumph
and overwhelm all opposition. But if we fail to
learn from history, we will be condemned to
relive it.
The writer is president of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

______

[2]

Nepali Times
29 June 07 - 05 July 07

Editorial

FULL SPEED AHEAD

Prime Minister Girijababu wanted the polls to be
held on Monday, 26 November. Chief Election
Commissioner Bhoj Rajji thought Friday the 23rd
would be more appropriate. Ignoring both
suggestions, the cabinet picked Thursday, 22
November.

Superstition may have had something to do with
the date. Thursday is dedicated to Brihaspati, a
sage worshipped for his sagacity towards rebels.
What better day to let Maoists test their
strength in free and fair elections?

The hue and cry over YCL excesses has been
largely justified. But it requires more than
media rebukes to counter the Red Guard menace in
the coming months. The district administration
needs to be energised and the morale of Nepal
Police boosted. This may necessitate a change of
leadership in the Home Ministry right away.
Creating faith in the machinery of the government
is the best antidote to Maoist vigilante
prosecution and kangaroo justice.

Engaging rebellious groups in meaningful
negotiations, through intermediaries if
necessary, needs top priority of the political
leadership. It will be difficult to conduct
peaceful polls without at least the passive
acquiescence of armed groups creating mayhem in
the madhes.

It's getting late for the political parties to
launch a full-scale political mobilisation.
Political training for party officials, voter
education and consensus-building are all fine and
dandy but there is no substitute to a
door-to-door electoral campaign. The monsoon
isn't the best time to venture into Nepali
countryside, but urban-dwellers have no rice
planting to do. We can't put this forcefully
enough: parties have to go back to their voters,
ask their forgiveness, promise to mend their
ways, and show that they are serious about
building the future.

The Nepali people have been duped so often in the
past that they will need some convincing to
accept that the November polls are for real.
While the election juggernaut moves full speed
ahead, a perceptible improvement in service
delivery is necessary. It shouldn't be too
difficult to augment water supply, reduce
blackout hours, repair roads, or crackdown on
crime. Reducing the petroleum shortage is urgent
to restore faith in the system.

In the countryside, the people don't expect
change overnight. But they want to see a sign
that there is a change in attitude among
Kathmandu-based politicos. Mainstreaming the
Maoists and addressing the concerns of the
marginalised is essential, as is law and order.

But what the people need the most is at least the
perception that the elections will mean an
improvement in their lives and the lives of their
children.

______

[3]

National Post, Toronto
28 June 2007

BRITAIN ISN'T WORTHY OF RUSHDIE
by Tarek Fatah

Sunday, Oct. 1, 1989 was a typically chilly
morning in London. That did not dampen the
enthusiasm of thousands of angry British Muslims
who were heading toward the Royal Albert Hall to
hear a South African orator, Ahmed Deedat, rip
into Salman Rushdie for writing The Satanic
Verses.

Nearly 6,000 men, some bussed in from as far as
Birmingham, jammed the hall. What happened at the
start of the event tells us a lot about the
Rushdie saga, which it seems, will not die until
the man they now call Sir Salman is sent to his
death.

The first speaker read a piece from Rushdie's
Satanic Verses and asked The audience how many
were familiar with that passage or had read the
book. Only one person raised his hand. One man
out of 6,000! They had come to demand the banning
of The Satanic Verses, but had not read the book.

That has been the story of the Rushdie affair for
the last 18 years. If Rushdie had intended to
defame Islam, his naysayers have helped him do so.

Now he has been given a knighthood by the Queen
for his life's work as a writer, and parts of the
Islamic world are revisiting the rage from 1989.

Many are familiar with comments by Ijaz ul-Haq,
the Religious Affairs Minister of Pakistan,
justifying suicide attacks against Rushdie
because he had "insulted Islam."

But an equally repugnant threat from the Speaker
of the legislative assembly of the Pakistani
province of Punjab has gone largely unnoticed.
The Speaker, Chaudhry Mohammad Afzal Sahi, while
presiding over the legislature, said he would
kill Salman Rushdie if he came face to face with
him.

This is standard and predictable fare. What has
changed, however, between 1989 and today is the
impact these extremists have had on the U.K. In
1989 politicians of all stripes stood up to
defend Rushdie; this time the response has been
at best cowardly, and at worst an attempt to
appease the Islamists.

Members of Britain's Parliament representing
large Muslim populations were the first to
surrender any sense of dignity or self-respect.
The Cabinet minister Jack Straw, still smarting
from the reactions to his remarks on the Burqa,
cozied up to his Islamist constituents. He cast
doubt on the value of knighting Rushdie, by
mocking the author's literary worth. He was
quoted as saying, "I'm afraid I found his books
rather difficult and I've never managed to get to
the end of any of them...I'm afraid his writing
has defeated me."

A Conservative MP, Stewart Jackson, launched a
furious attack on Rushdie, suggesting the
knighthood had "threatened anti-terrorism
co-operation." Jackson did not disclose the fact
that in the last election, he had narrowly
defeated the Labour candidate and on the night of
his victory had said he had won by "gaining the
trust of a large percentage of the city's Muslim
population." Jackson, who leads the Friends of
Islam group, also questioned the merits of
Rushdie1s literary worth, saying his books are
"rubbish."

Not to be outdone in this clamour to appease the
Islamist vote bank, the Liberal-Democrats'
Shirley Williams went on BBC's Question Time to
condemn the government for honouring the
novelist, without a word of protest against the
goons issuing the death threats.

In London, Lord Ahmed, Britain's first Muslim
peer, said he had been appalled by the award to a
man he accused of having "blood on his hands."
Not satisfied with his vitriol, Lord Ahmed, who
had no hesitation accepting membership of the
House of Lords, compared the knighthood of
Rushdie to the honouring of the 9/11 terrorists.

One would have expected the British government to
haul in the Pakistani and Iranian ambassadors and
protest the criminal death threats against a
British knight, Sir Salman. But no. The British
establishment had neither the integrity nor the
resolve to stand up to the bullies. Instead,
British ambassadors were hauled in to hear
protests by Iranian and Pakistani officials.

It is time that the world recognized that the
threat to Salman Rushdie is not just to him, but
to all of us. And it is not just the Islamists
who need to be condemned, but also the flaccid
British response to these would-be murderers.

A country that has to apologize and bend over
backward to distance itself from the person it
seeks to honour, is not worthy of having a knight
called Sir Salman. My message to Salman Rushdie
is that he should say to the Queen, "Thanks, but
no thanks."

[Tarek Fatah is founder of the Muslim Canadian
Congress and is author of Chasing a Mirage: An
Islamic State or a State of Islam, to be
published by John Wiley & Sons in 2008]

______

[4]

Indian Express
July 03, 2007

KASHMIR AT TIPPING POINT AGAIN?

by Muzamil Jaleel

Last Tuesday was a tumultuous day in Bandipore,
a little valley on the banks of Wular lake in
north Kashmir. Two incidents took place here in a
matter of a few hours which together may
symbolise the beginning of a new paradigm shift
in J&K. They signal a renewed phase of violence
with the sluggish peace process.

Two men from a local Rashtriya Rifles unit barged
into a house in a small neighbourhood of Gurjjars
in Kunan village. They were in plainclothes and
carried a grenade. The family alleged that the
two had asked the male members to leave and then
attempted to rape their daughter. The family
raised an alarm and, within minutes, the entire
village encircled the house. The angry villagers
overpowered the two armymen and started thrashing
them. Their faces were then blackened and they
were taken in a procession to Bandipore market.
This is one of the first incidents since
militancy began in Kashmir in 1990 of common
people taking the law into their own hands.
Interestingly, the villagers didn't even mask
their faces.

A few miles away, an interesting incident was
taking place around the same time in another
village. The villagers were returning to their
homes after burying a local boy who had joined
the militants recently and was killed in an
encounter with the army. A group of separatist
leaders from the moderate Hurriyat faction had
come to join the funeral ceremony. But as soon as
they started addressing the villagers, there were
angry shouts from the crowd. The Hurriyat leaders
were told to stop "doing business on dead
bodies". The incident indicated that this
village, known for its separatist leanings, had
transcended another fear.

The two incidents have no apparent connection but
they clearly suggest that the silent majority,
driven by desperation, is beginning to assert
itself. This may well signify a shift in the
Valley, where the situation is once again getting
fraught. The UPA government at the Centre has not
done anything tangible to sustain the tempo of
the few confidence-building measures on the
ground, like the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus or
direct talks with Kashmiri separatist groups. As
for Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, he is clearly feeling
the pressure of losing out to the hawks and has
started drifting towards hardline posturing as
well. Meanwhile, the Peoples Conference leader,
Sajjad Lone, has exploded something of a
political bombshell by talking about the "opt out
option" - making the district a unit for the
internal reorganisation of the state. This new
formula has come as a direct response to the
demand for a separate state of Jammu, raised by
the Jammu Mukti Morcha, a group which has the
overt and covert support of the BJP and Congress.
Lone's salvo is popular in the Valley and other
Muslim-dominated regions of the state where
people constantly complain of discrimination in
development projects and in getting
administrative jobs.

In fact, the Centre's dialogue process with
Srinagar does not include a single separatist
leader. The only direct measure the Centre has
taken to push its peace process forward was to
hold a few working group meetings. Not only was
the political representation in these meetings
inadequate, the government is being extremely
tardy in implementing its recommendations.

The Centre's manner of handling this process has
added to this new disenchantment. A few months
ago, when the PDP had threatened to walk out of
the ruling J&K coalition, demanding troop
withdrawal from the state, the Centre intervened
and framed a high-level committee led by Defence
Minister A.K. Antony to investigate the
feasibility of a troop cut on the ground. But
before the committee started its work and arrived
at a conclusion, the defence minister publicly
ruled out even a modest cut in troops. The
unexpected intervention of J&K Governor, Lt Gen
(retd) S.K. Sinha in the debate, did not help. He
termed the PDP's demand as "obnoxious".

From all indications it does seem that the period
of relative tranquillity that saw Kashmir move
towards peace may well be coming to an end. It is
a fact that the infiltration levels have come
down to an all-time low - seen as a fall-out of
the Indo-Pak peace process. However, the sudden
increase in activity across the LoC and a spurt
of violence in the frontier district of Kupwara
suggests the Pakistan establishment seems to have
turned on the tap again. The security agencies
say that more than 200 militants have already
entered Kupwara district alone, even as a dozen
infiltration bids were foiled along the LoC in
the districts of Kupwara and Baramulla recently.

Kashmir has entered a critical phase and if
immediate measures are not taken to push the
Indo-Pak peace process forward, with visible
outcomes on the ground, there is every likelihood
that the earlier atmosphere of hope will be soon
be overtaken by renewed bloodshed.

______

[5]

The Telegraph
June 28, 2007

ALARMING NOTES FROM THE UNDERGROUND
The use of maximum force in dealing with the
Naxalite menace is destined to fail unless it is
backed by constructive development that involves
the local population, writes Anuradha Chenoy

The author is professor, School of International Studies, JNU

Parallel force

The districts of Jharkhand and Chattisgarh, known
as the Naxal-affected belts, are areas where the
scheduled tribes and castes make up more than 60
per cent of the population. Poverty is endemic in
this region. The government is carrying out two
types of development. The first is based on
industries, mining and commercialization, and the
second is linked with the National Rural
Employment Guarantee Act, the mid-day meal scheme
and primary education. As far as the Naxal
problem is concerned, the policy is to use
'maximum force'. Which of these development
models and policies is working is a critical
question for the future of these states and their
people.

The first developmental policy regarding the
increase of private investment and ownership in
mining, forestry, and so on is not new. This type
of development was the initial reason behind the
alienation of tribals since they saw their
communal methods of ownership and freedom being
curtailed. As large areas are cordoned off to
make mines, large dams and special economic
zones, tribals are displaced and turned into
migrant labour. Tribal customs, like the making
of local brew from Mahua trees, have been banned
and foreign liquor shops have come up. The
Naxalites have thrived in such an iniquitous
environment.

The second developmental model, connected with
social and economic schemes, is becoming
increasingly popular, although it is using only
25-30 per cent of its capacity. Recent surveys by
the Right to Food Group have revealed many
problems with these schemes which need correction
to make them effective and beneficial to more
people. Yet, these schemes work in the
'Naxal-affected' areas and because of their
popularity even the Naxals support these
programmes, testifying to their importance. The
government argues that Naxals "impede
development". But when development is positive
and supported at the ground level, anyone wanting
political legitimacy is forced to support it.

The Naxals work on small-time development issues
like running some schools, health centres, dams,
foodgrain banks, and so on. This gives them local
level support, without which they would not be
able to survive. The Maoists levy taxes and
extort money from contractors and the locals for
such work and for procuring the wide range of
weapons that they possess. The level of support
to Naxals in Jharkhand, where they are fast
spreading, however varies.

In areas where the local population sees that
significant efforts are being made by the
government for improvement, the Naxals are not
popular. Who would want to go to a Naxal school
if the government school functioned? But in most
places people are fed up with the police.
Villagers say that if the Naxals come at night
and want to be fed, the police invariably turn up
next morning and want to be bribed. The choice
then is between the "Maowadi and Khaowadi".

Anyone interested in these areas, from the local
member of parliament or that of the state
legislature, to contractors and businessmen, has
to have some alliance with the Maoists. How else
would elections be held? And how else would
contracts be completed? The Naxals argue, "In our
zones, anyone can pass through if their identity
is clear." Maoists, in fact, no longer believe in
'liberated zones' but in 'zones of influence',
where they co-exist with others and where they
have parallel judicial and executive structures -
the jan adalat (peoples' court) and their militia
that executes. The smallest unit is the two-man
village unit; then there is the area secretary
and the area commander. Area decisions are taken
together by the area commander and secretary. The
sub-zonal committee is overseen by the zonal
committee and the zonal commander. They are
assisted by a local guerilla squad and a special
guerilla squad. Leaders and guerilla squads do
not comprise all locals. They can be from any
other region. The entire party is underground.

It is known that women have functioned as
supporters, couriers and leaders, but very few
come up for the 'risky work'. The women's
organization, the Nari Mukti Sangh, functions at
all levels, including in the armed squad, where
women get full military training. Most women join
this movement because of poverty and some because
of ideology. The major work of politicization is
undertaken by them.

The police have little knowledge of the
functioning, except when Naxals are caught and
then named 'commander', whatever their real
status. Thus the local people often suffer police
brutalities as there is little to distinguish
between them and the Maoists. This is especially
so in Jharkhand, where the Naxals are more local.

In the meantime, the police have killed hundreds
of alleged Naxalites in 'encounters'. They do not
allow first information reports to be registered
and give no compensation to families. The fear of
the contesting militia has divided villages and
caused fear and internal displacement, forcing
villagers to evacuate their houses and camps,
leading to unending personal tragedies.

Like the special security forces created earlier
to deal with insurgency in the North-east and in
Kashmir, the Salwa Judam was created in
Chattisgarh. This government-sponsored force of
well-armed local volunteers comprises former
insurgents and the local youth. This state-armed
unofficial militia has caused much harm and
turned more people towards insurgency. It has
helped militarize the society, where children now
dream of guns, and the use of force is the
accepted method of negotiation. This militia is
unable to distinguish between ordinary civilians
and insurgents. They see the entire community as
'enemy', similar to the 'bounty killers' who are
used in all local disputes.

Many human rights groups have recorded the
excesses of this militia. Such reports, however,
have been ignored. Instead, journalists and
activists have been branded as 'sympathizers'.
Meanwhile, the Salwa Judam model is being copied
in other areas like Jharkhand, where the Nagrik
Rakshak Samiti or Narsu has been working along
the same lines and all local sources testify to
its unpopularity and criminality.

Maximum force has been officially justified
because of the killing and looting by the Naxals.
Local officials say that once Naxals are caught,
torture is essential to extract information.
Figures, however, show that the number of
Naxal-related incidents has not decreased, rather
the number of human rights violations by both
sides have significantly increased. Further, if
the incidents and violations decrease in one area
they simultaneously increase in another. For
example, incidents of Naxalite strikes have gone
down in Andhra Pradesh, but if nine out of 16
districts were affected in Chattisgarh, 18 out of
22 districts are affected in Jharkhand today.

In these circumstances, the schemes like the
NREGA are all the more important. Yet they are
still to be fully implemented. The Right to Food
group witnessed that while there was increasing
awareness of the act, the staff to implement it
was still inadequate. There were delays in wage
payments, there was lack of institutional
arrangements (for example, Jharkhand has no
panchayat elections), a monitoring system and
accountability.

The outcome is thus already quite clear. People
support ideas that benefit them and involve them.
The idea of development based on human rights has
become rooted in the minds of the people. To deny
this is to lead to more conflict on all sides.

______

[6] [India: Binayak Sen is a celebrated
people's doctor who deserves the highest honour
for his long years of service of the
underprivileged has been imprisoned on trumped up
charges. The security hawks who run the show in
Chhattissgarh have been petitioned by concerned
citizens and human rights activists from all over
India and with growing support internationally.
-- see articles below.-SACW Editor ]

o o o

(i)

The Lancet
30 June 2007

ARREST OF PAEDIATRICIAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST BINAYAK SEN

by Anand Zachariah and Sara Bhattacharji

We are writing to make known to the international
medical community the shocking imprisonment of
Binayak Sen on May 14, 2007, in the central
Indian state of Chhattisgarh. A well known
paediatrician and public-health specialist, Sen's
is a rare example of the cost of involvement in
civil rights activism by physicians. He is being
charged by the local police with illicit
communication with Maoists in custody.

After a distinguished academic career at
Christian Medical College, Vellore, during his
undergraduate and postgraduate training, Sen
joined the faculty of the Centre for Social
Medicine and Public Health at the Jawaharlal
Nehru University, New Delhi (1976-78).

For the past 30 years, Sen has been developing
models of primary health in Madhya Pradesh and
subsequently in the new state of Chhattisgarh. He
is well known for setting up a self-funded
cooperative hospital for mine workers, the
Shaheed hospital, and he had a significant role
in evolving the statewide "Mitanin" programme of
training community health workers. In 2004, the
Christian Medical College conferred on him the
Paul Harrison Award-the highest recognition
accorded to an alumnus for distinguished work in
rural areas.

Apart from these socially relevant health-care
activities, what sets Sen apart has been his deep
commitment to the defence of civil liberties,
including fact-finding missions into human rights
violations such as custodial deaths,
extra-judicial killings by state police, and
hunger deaths in remote and politically turbulent
communities. In recent times, he has worked
ceaselessly to focus national and international
attention on large-scale oppression and
malgovernance within the Salwa Judoom (which has
become a kind of non-state militia) in the
Dantewara district of Chhattisgarh. He has given
leadership to the nationwide People's Union for
Civil Liberties as General Secretary in
Chhattisgarh and as Vice President at the
national level.

Sen is a man of impeccable integrity,
self-denial, and peace who has worked steadfastly
for the rights and wellbeing of ordinary people,
particularly the tribals. We feel that the
allegations of unlawful activities on his part
are aimed at silencing an inconvenient voice in
defence of the oppressed.

The Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act,
2005, under which he is imprisoned, permits
arbitrary detention with no remedy of appeal or
review for a maximum period of imprisonment of 7
years for any expression or act which the state
may deem as disturbing public order. The
repressive features of this law make us concerned
about his safety and wellbeing.

We urge the international medical community to
raise their voice to demand the release of this
distinguished doctor and civil rights activist.

We are colleagues of Binayak Sen.

o o o

(ii)

THIS IS NOT A STORY ABOUT BINAYAK SEN
by Subhash Gatade

This is not a story of the fifty plus Children's
doctor Binayak Sen from Raipur, Chattisgarh who
is at present languishing in jail under draconian
provisions of a law which has declared him a
'terrorist' because he had the courage to speak
truth to power.

This is not meant to be a story of two young
daughters of this man who are eagerly waiting for
their father who is one of their closest friends
and with whom they have shared all secrets of the
world.

This is not a story of Illina, whose
companionship with Binayak exceeds more than
three decades, and who recently penned down her
experiences at the jail gate, where ordinary
people - who want to have a glimpse of their near
and dear ones lodged in the jail - are even
robbed of their last Penny by the custodians of
law and order.

This is also not a story of those kids from
nearby villages who joined a protest
demonstration held in Raipur to express their
bewilderment over the arrest of their doctoruncle
who use to tell them interesting stories when he
could find some free time at the community
clinics.

This is also not meant to tell you my first
meeting with this gem of a man way back in 1981
in Dalli Rajhara, District Durg where the
legendary Shankar Guha Niyogi had charted a new
path in worker's struggle and where the idea to
start a Shahid Hospital - a hospital started by
workers of the mines for the other toiling masses
of the area - was germinating then.

This is also not a story of the institution
called Vellore Medical College which felt
honoured to have produced a student of such
calibre and felicitated him for his conscious
decision to work for the poor and downtrodden.

This is also not a story of the manner in which
ex-students of this college who are spread in
different parts of the world have taken the
initiative to mobilise the medical community of
the world to tell the powers that be that the
proper place for a children's doctor should be
among childern and their parents and not the
confines of a jail.

This is also not a story of the work Dr Sen did
as an adviser to the community health scheme of
the state called 'Mitanin' nor a description of
the program wherein he was awarded the
prestigious Paul Harrison award for his
commendable work in community health.

This is also not a story of the appeal sent by
world renowned individuals/activists like Noam
Chomsky, Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib etc. who felt
'dismayed' at the 'continued detention of Sen'
and who have demanded that all charges against Dr
Sen be dropped immediately and he be released
forthwith.

Of course nor it is a report of the widening
ambit of state harassment which today includes
Illina Sen, Gautam Bandopadhyaya and Rashmi
Dwivedi, Rajendra Sail - members of People's
Union For Civil Liberties and other organisations
who have refused to bow before the machinations
of the state machinery. It is the same state
machinery which has acquired the dracula like
qualities of bumping off innocents and which did
not have any qualms going to the ridiculous
extent of arresting Dr Sen as an 'emissary of a
naxalite' when the said meetings were held in the
presence of police themselves.

This is not a critique of the manner in which a
broad section of the media preferred to toe the
government line and putting all journalistic
ethical norms to the winds presented sensational,
juicy stories to demonise this ex-adviser to the
state government on its community health schemes.

This is also not a story of the frightening
message on wireless sent by a Superintendent of
Police stationed in one of those 'troubled
districts' in Chattisgarh itself which clearly
instructed the armed police to target
journalists, individuals who seem to be
overzealous about the question of human rights.

This also does not deal with the so called Peace
Campaign called Salwa Judum - where a section of
the tribals have been armed at the behest of the
government- who have become a law unto
themselves, where they have been found to be
burning villages and abusing their women. It also
does not deal with the manner in which this
'Peace Campaign' has uprooted more than 40,000
villagers and placed them in camps along the
road, reminding people of the failed strategic
hamlets used by the US military in South Vietnam
more than forty years ago.

The following writeup does not intend to once
again bring to the fore the grief of a mother
called Madiyam Soni ( there are thousands of such
women ) from a non-descript village Ponjer whose
son's life was snuffed out by the security forces
and whose body was found with similar eleven
bodies at a place called Santoshpur much farther
from her village.

To be very frank all such insignificant sounding
details about ordinary people's ordinary lives,
their travails and tribulations, and the response
of the powers that be towards their attempts to
aspire for a normal life with dignity is not the
crux of this writeup. One very well knows that
neither do they carry any import for the
custodians of this country nor the articulate
sections of our society. Perhaps all such details
from the hinterland of India are meaningless for
the young generation also which is busy
networking with friends from the other part of
the globe thanks to the various websites which
have sprung up.

This is in fact a story of all those people who
have rather stopped thinking about all these
relevant things.

This is in fact a story of the continuous
bombardment of messages through various channels
which has rather desensitised a greater lot among
us towards the mundane looking sufferings of the
people.

This is in fact a story of the criminal silence
which all such stories, reports normally
encounter - may it be the declaration of a
children's doctor as 'Public Enemy No. 1' or for
that matter fake encounter killings in some
hinterland of India .
This is in fact a story of reassessing whose
lives we should value and prioritize.

This is in fact a story of getting ready to ask
some discomforting questions about the system in
which we live.

Perhaps the need of the hour seems to be starting
with a simple query : When would the two
daughters meet their father ?

______

[7]

South Asians Against Nukes
June 28, 2007
URL: groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/message/1052

o o o o

June 30, 2007 12:08 PM

STATEMENT ON USS NIMITZ BY COALITION FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT AND PEACE (CNDP)

We are distressed that the Indian government has
granted permission to the United States aircraft
carrier Nimitz to make a call at Chennai port for
rest and recreation. The government claims that
the nuclear-powered ship is "not known to be
carrying nuclear weapons" on board, and hence
that its call does not violate India's
well-established, often-reiterated policy of
disallowing foreign nuclear weapons into its
territorial waters.

This claim flies in the face of the U.S.'s
well-reiterated policy to "neither deny nor
confirm" the presence of nuclear weapons on its
warships under any circumstances, and its
standing instructions to military personnel. The
fact that New Delhi has gratuitously granted this
certificate to the U.S., when Washington itself
does not do so, speaks poorly of our foreign and
security policies.

It also marks a reversal of Indias past policy
opposing the transit of nuclear weapons in its
neighbourhood and the U.S. base at Diego Garcia,
and its demand for a Zone of Peace in the Indian
Ocean.

The contention that the visit of USS Nimitz
should be condoned because 10 other
nuclear-powered ships/submarines have visited
Indian ports in recent years lacks logic. Such
precedents cannot justify a policy violation. It
is known that the nuclear weapons-states usually
base some or all their nuclear warheads on
nuclear-powered vessels.

A visit to India of the Nimitz, one of two U.S.
aircraft carriers recently mobilised in the
Persian Gulf to threaten Iran, will send out a
negative international signal in the context of
the destabilisation of West Asia caused by the
U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Such "military interactions" point to an erosion
of foreign policy independence and a departure
from the United Progressive Alliance's promise to
work for a balanced, multipolar world free of
nuclear weapons.

19. Thoughts on The Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia

Gregory L. Possehl

______

[9] ANNOUNCEMENTS:

(i)

Sahmat, The Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust has
mounted two exhibitions on the great uprising of
1857. The exhibition in Hindi titled "Ajab Saal
Tha Wo" and the English "Red the Earth" are being
put up at Gandhi Smriti & Darshan Samiti at Birla
House,

Gandhi Smriti,
5 Tees January Marg,
New Delhi-110011.
Ph: 23012843; 23011480
The exhibitions will be on view from the 3rd of
July to 29th July, 2007 from 10am to 5 pm (except
Mondays).

SAHMAT is remounting it's exhibition on 1857, RED
THE EARTH, made for the 140th anniversary of the
rebellion in 1997. Researched by historians Irfan
Habib, the Late Ravinder Kumar, Amar Farooqui,
Shireen Moosvi in collaboration with The Centre
for Advanced History, AMU, Aligarh, Nehru
Memorial Museum and Library, Teen Murti, Delhi,
ICHR, Delhi. The Visual material was researched
by Ram Rahman, with generous help from Prof
Narayani Gupta, Professor Jim Masselos, the Late
Ravi Dayal, PK Shukla, BN Sahai and Dr SB Roy.
The exhibition has been updated with extensive
new material, some never seen in public for many
years, including a rare photo of Rani Lakshmibai.
Many of the proclamations which were issued
during the rebellion are in the original and in
translations. There is an entire section with
maps and photographs on the destruction of Delhi
by the British after their victory.

o o o

(ii)

CREATING DEMOCRACY, CELEBRATING DIVERSITY

July 6-8, 2007
Ahmedabad

Anhad is organising a National Students' Festival
for Peace, Justice and Communal Harmony from July
6th to 8th, 2007 in Ahmadabad.

The festival is dedicated to the memory of Vasant
Rav and Rajab Ali. Vasant and Rajab were two
friends who were killed in 1946 on July 1 while
trying to stop a riot in the Ahmadabad city.
Anhad has been observing their martyrdom day as
the Day for Communal Harmony every year since its
inception in 2003.

Anhad had announced a National Competition
'Creating Democracy, Celebrating Diversity' for
media, film, school and college students in
February 2007.

The festival is showcasing the winning entries. A
total of 60 paintings by school children, 80
poster designs and product designs ( t-shirts,
mugs, book marks etc) will be displayed at the
exhibition. 45 documentary films made by students
from various media institutes of India will be
screened. A set of new peace posters will be
released on the ocassion. A Cd of new peace songs
selected from different schools will also be
released. This music cd will also contain a
song: gar ho sake to ab koye shamma jalayeye.
Indian Ocean's Rahul Ram has specially sung this
song for the music cd.

Shivji Panikkar will inaugurate the exhibition on
July 6th at 10.30am at the Father Erviti Memorial
Hall, St Xaviers' Social Service Society, Opp
Loyola School, Naranpura, Ahmedabad. Shri Prakash
Shah will preside and speak on the occasion.

Nafisa Ali will inaugurate the Student's Film
Festival on July 6th at 11.30 at the Diamond
Jubilee Auditorium, Loyola Hall, St Xavier's High
School Campus, Naranpura, Ahmedabad. Gagan Sethi
will speak on the occasion.

Documentary filmmakers Rakesh Sharma, Gauhar Raza
and advertising professional Harsh Purohit (all
three were part of the Jury) will give away the
merit certificates at the Closing ceremony on
July 8, 2007 at 4pm.

You are most cordially invited to the Festival. The entry is free.

We request all the organizations to encourage
young activists to attend the festival.

Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: http://insaf.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.